Case T-454/08: Action brought on 6 October 2008 — Grand Hotel Abi d'Oru v Commission
Date: 2008-10-06
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for annulment (EU), aid system, common market, economic sanctions, investment project

22.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/59

the subject-matter of

— failure to state adequate reasons as regards the amendment
of
the
misuse of aid measure No 278/99, and the ‘extension’ which
led to the adoption of the contested decision;

the procedure opened for

— infringement of Article 88(2) EC in so far as the statement
in recital 74 of the decision, regarding the unlawful imple-
mentation of the aid in question, is outside the scope of that
provision;

— breach of the principle of transparency;

— failure to state adequate reasons as regards the principle of
the reasonable duration of the formal investigation proce-
dure;

— failure to state reasons as regards the recovery of the aid
already disbursed, having regard to the fact that this point
was also of particular importance in relation to the principle
of the protection of legitimate interests of third parties and
to the unreasonably lengthy duration of the proceedings;

— breach of the de minimis principle laid down in Commission
Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the
application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de
minimis aid (2).

(1) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 30.

submitted an application for aid under
before starting work on an initial
(Article 1 of the Decision);

the scheme
investment project’

(b) orders that

the
‘[t]he Italian Republic shall
incompatible aid granted under the scheme referred to
in Article 1 from the recipients’ (Article 2(1) of the Deci-
sion);

recover

(c) orders that ‘[t]he The Italian Republic shall cancel all
outstanding payments of aid under the scheme referred
to in Article 1 with effect from the date of adoption of
this Decision’ (Article 2(4) of the Decision).

— Order the Commission to pay the costs of

the present

proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The contested decision in the present case is the same as that at
issue in Case T-394/08 Regione Sardegna v Commission, Case
T-408/08 S.F. Turistico Immobiliare v Council and Commission and
Case T-436/08 Studio Vacanze v Commission.

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put
forward in those cases.

Action brought on 3 October 2008 — Timsas v
Commission

(Case T-453/08)

(2008/C 301/97)

Language of the case: Italian

Action brought on 6 October 2008 — Grand Hotel Abi
d'Oru v Commission

(Case T-454/08)

(2008/C 301/98)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Grand Hotel Abi d'Oru SpA (Olbia, Italy) (represented
by: D. Dodaro and S. Cianciullo, lawyers)

Applicant: Timsas Srl (Arezzo, Italy) (represented by: D. Dodaro,
S. Pinna and S. Cianciullo, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Forms of order sought

— Annul the Decision in so far as it:

(a) states that ‘[t]he [S]tate aid granted in accordance with
Regional Act No 9 of 1998, unlawfully put into effect
by Italy in Resolution (deliberazione) No 33/6 and in the
is incompatible with the
first call
aid
the
common market unless

for applications,

recipient of

the

Forms of order sought

— Annul the Decision in so far as it:

(a) states that ‘[t]he [S]tate aid granted in accordance with
Regional Act No 9 of 1998, unlawfully put into effect
by Italy in Resolution (deliberazione) No 33/6 and in the
is incompatible with the
first call
aid
the
common market unless
the
the scheme
submitted an application for aid under
before starting work on an initial
investment project’
(Article 1 of the Decision);

for applications,

recipient of

C 301/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.11.2008

(b) orders that

the
‘[t]he Italian Republic shall
incompatible aid granted under the scheme referred to
in Article 1 from the recipients’ (Article 2(1) of the Deci-
sion);

recover

(c) orders that ‘[t]he The Italian Republic shall cancel all
outstanding payments of aid under the scheme referred
to in Article 1 with effect from the date of adoption of
this Decision’ (Article 2(4) of the Decision).

— Order the Commission to pay the costs of

the present

proceedings.

Decision 2001/462/EC (1) in Case COMP/C-3/37.990 — Intel
relating to a proceeding under Article 82 EC, together with a
decision by the Commissioner on or about 6 October 2008.
The contested decisions concern the refusal on the part of the
Commission to procure, particularly from the complainant in
the case, certain documentary evidence that the applicant claims
to be directly relevant to the allegations made by the Commis-
sion in the SSO. The Hearing Officer has also rejected Intel's
submission that it cannot respond properly to the SSO without
being provided with those documents, and has refused to
further extend the deadline for Intel to file its reply to the SSO.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant puts forward two pleas in law in support of its
claims.

The contested decision in the present case is the same as that at
issue in Case T-394/08 Regione Sardegna v Commission, Case
T-408/08 S.F. Turistico Immobiliare v Council and Commission and
Case T-436/08 Studio Vacanze v Commission.

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put
forward in those cases.

Action brought on 10 October 2008 — Intel v
Commission

(Case T-457/08)

(2008/C 301/99)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Intel Corp. (Wilmington, United States) (represented
by: N. Green QC, K. Bacon, Barrister)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the decisions;

— Extend the deadline for submission of Intel's reply to the
supplementary statement of objections (‘SSO’) to a period of
30 days from the date on which Intel is given access to the
relevant documents of the complainant;

— Order the Commission to pay Intel's costs.

First, the applicant submits that the decisions contain errors in
law and it claims that the time-limit for its reply to the SSO
cannot start to run unless the file is materially complete; other-
wise the undertaking wouldn't be able to exercise effectively its
rights of defence.

Secondly, the applicant argues that the contested decisions are
manifestly illegal because they permit
the Commission to
continue with an investigation which is discriminatory and
partial, and which prevents the applicant from exercising its
rights of defence. The applicant claims that this constitutes the
violation of
sound administration which
requires the Commission to adopt its decision on the basis of all
available factual and legal
information which might have a
bearing on the result.

the principle of

(1) Commission Decision of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of
hearing officers in certain competition proceedings, OJ L 162, p. 21.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 September 2008
— Italian Republic v Commission

(Case T-207/04) (1)

(2008/C 301/100)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(1) OJ C 201, 7.8.2004.

By means of this application the applicant seeks annulment,
pursuant to Article 230 EC, of the Hearing Officer's decision of
15 September 2008 taken under Article 10 of Commission